C, and what it is for

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <3162 at utastro.UUCP> nather at utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather) writes:
>In article <1988Sep22.163950.13700 at utzoo.uucp>, henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> Sensible standards committees focus on standardizing existing, well-proven
>> practice, not on redesigning the language to try to make everybody happy.
>True. Look how thoroughly trigrams were proven before they were included
>in the new ANSI standard for the C language.

First, please note that there is NOT an ANSI standard for the C language.
Next, trigraphs were indeed an attempt to make someone (Europeans) happy,
and they have failed miserably to do so, which reinforces Henry's point.
X3J11 will have to decide whether or not trigraphs, some alternative
similar facility, or no such facility will be in the next draft of the
proposed ANS for C.  There are pending public review comments on this.